| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
SmtPersona
Australia5 Posts
Here's the link for the video: Starcraft: 7 years in 7 minutes In saying all this I am happy that from the few threads I have read, that some people are actually making valid suggestions to Blizzard with logical reasoning and as a life long fan of Starcraft, even during the BroodWar days, I am glad that we are still A-OK. From those of you who never actually took the time to watch the video then I'll say one thing, "Rome was not build in a day." ...........(<---- WTF WHO IS THIS GAY GUY) | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5217 Posts
HOTS is not WOL, it isn't an entirely new game where we don't know the issues. HOTS is an expansion that should add a few units to help break up the stale meta-game and add variety, make the game more fun, and address balance issues. Units like the Warhound, Widow Mine, and Replicant and abilities like Entomb do not do this. Their existence brings into question who is coming up with these ideas and the understanding Blizzard has of the game. The Tempest was originally suppose to solve a problem that didn't really exist. Mutalisks are not solved best by Stargate play, they are solved by Storm and Blink Stalkers because that is useful versus other Zerg units, while Pheonixes and anti-air Tempests would not be (the ability to transition is very important). Now the Tempest fills a completely different roll. And a lot of people (including me) spoke out against the Replicant and Entomb before the beta even began. They were terrible ideas, that brought nothing to the table. Fact is, Blizzard doesn't understand the game, evidenced by the ever changing roll that Warhounds, Tempests and Oracles have had. While it may be a Beta, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that Entomb was terrible and skilless, that the Replicant would lead people to simply not build certain units, and that the Warhound was the definition of a boring A-move unit. Those kind of ideas don't even need to tested, because they'll never be good. And look what happened when they were tested! Heck, they truly believed that Siege Tanks lines and positional play were ruining TvT, and we needed more deathballs. They even said it in this video (fast forward to 18:40). "So the Marines and Tanks are spread out pretty well... Now obviously if all these Siege Tanks and Marines were packed up tightly... there is no way this Hellion/Warhound army could push this line." Thanks David Kim, we'll form our Tanks and Marines into a deathball now so we can combat the Hellion/Warhound deathball. TvT will be so much better now without positional play. Now it isn't all bad, some new units are great and enhance the game. But given the fact Blizzard took way too long to make simple changes in WOL to address the imbalance (we just recently got ramp blockers in HOTS, how long did it take them to figure this out, how long was the community asking for it, how long did tournaments use them?) combined with their terrible unit ideas for HOTS, it shows their lack of understanding of the game. As it should happen with any business, at some point people need to stand up and say "What the hell is going on here?" when a business isn't listening to their customers and has bad ideas that people don't want. At this point I think heads need to roll at Blizzard, and a new team needs to take over who understands the game and listens to the community and professional players. | ||
|
Switch24
United States20 Posts
| ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5217 Posts
On November 21 2012 02:57 Switch24 wrote: Also, above you reference "ramp blockers" like neutral depots and what not, why is Blizzard responsible for that? Blizzard is responsible for it on their own ladder. Also the lack of ramp blockers skews the ladder winrate against Zerg, which means they use skewed data to balancing the game. One would surmise that if ramp blockers were introduced today in WOL, that the Zerg winrate would jump slightly. I know I've done my fair share of ramp blocking in WOL when I've needed wins. On November 21 2012 02:57 Switch24 wrote: At the end of the day, they are the ones who determine what goes in and what doesn't. If they want to test out a unit like a warhound or an ability like entomb, so what? Because the community knows better and says it shouldn't even exist. That sounds dumb and immature. But what was the end result? The end result was the Warhound and Entomb were removed, because they were terrible ideas. So the community was dumb and immature for saying the ideas were terrible before the beta, but the "professional game designers" were right for introducing the ideas, but then withdrawing them because they didn't work? And the reasons Blizzard gave for removing the Warhound and Entomb were exactly the same reasons that the community gave long before. Let me tell you, it didn't take Nostradamus helping the community to figure out those ideas weren't going to work. You're right, Blizzard can test out whatever they want. But if you understand business, you'll know that they don't want to waste their time and money testing bad ideas. No business does. The fact they have shows how out of touch they are, regardless of whether or not they are "professional game designers". And it would be one thing if they tested bad ideas in a small setting within Blizzard, but to test openly them in the face of so much criticism and powerful logical arguments was ridiculous. And look what happened. At the end of the day, the success of this game and whether it becomes a real sport is decided by the fans and the community. And I have faith that Blizzard will release something workable in the end. But that doesn't mean they couldn't have done a lot better, and at this point, I think they can do a lot better. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On November 21 2012 02:57 Switch24 wrote: The point of a beta is try new units, new abilities, tweak old units, and reinvent strategies. We talk about oh the Warhound was 1-a move unit and yes we understand that this is not right but they are the creators of the games. At the end of the day, they are the ones who determine what goes in and what doesn't. If they want to test out a unit like a warhound or an ability like entomb, so what? Because the community knows better and says it shouldn't even exist. That sounds dumb and immature. We need to understand that these guys are professional game designers. They are testing abilities and units they have designed because they want real time use and real time data. They want to see what works and what doesn't and what can be used, like maybe haywire missiles. Unfortunately, we too often play betas as pretty much finished products which are used for testing network loads, and matchmaking systems. I play Halo as well and I remember playing the Reach Beta and all it did was test the network loads like 2 weeks before the release. Blizzard is actively trying everything and although we may not agree with each unit or ability or change, we need to give them all the way to the release before we can make a final decision. This comment rather sounds "dumb" to me. Any "believe in the Blizzard, because they are surely smarter than you" comment is terribly stupid, given the evidence we have. - The Warhound had to be removed, because it has a stupid concept ... - the Oracle and Mothership Core have had serious changes in their design concepts which really show they have no clue what should and what shouldnt be in the game ... - the Widow Mine has been changed a lot as well and it seems to have a potential for being overpowered if massed above a certain number and used correctly ... - a unit with 22 range? Really? REALLY? and it is designed as a replacement for another unit which they didnt even try to fix, but which is a true classic unit from BW ... So it is practically PROVEN by Blizzard themselves that they can come up with terrible terrible ideas and no one should think that they are smart enough to fix any of these by themselves. They NEED the input of the community, so insulting said community by saying "dont complain, because Blizzard knows how to deal with that" is terribly stupid. Add to this all the terrible and "political" answers from Dustin Browder in his interviews AND his very very dismissive answer on the alternative movement proposal and you get a clear idea of a bunch of people who seem to have a. no clue of what they are doing OR b. the arrogance to think they are always right and never ever make a mistake. Neither is very flattering and everyone who still thinks they will do it right probably needs to learn some wisdom. At the end of the day WE are the ones who are supposed to buy the expansion and while all the pros and fanatics will do that without a thought, what about the casuals? I for one am not going to do it, because playing the game in its current state isnt fun. | ||
|
green2000
Peru79 Posts
| ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
Thanks for posting it, quiet courageous too as you basically laid out a hater bait for multiple groups of haters and the white knights following them, to meet up in this thread. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On November 21 2012 02:57 Switch24 wrote: The point of a beta is try new units, new abilities, tweak old units, and reinvent strategies. We talk about oh the Warhound was 1-a move unit and yes we understand that this is not right but they are the creators of the games. At the end of the day, they are the ones who determine what goes in and what doesn't. If they want to test out a unit like a warhound or an ability like entomb, so what? Because the community knows better and says it shouldn't even exist. That sounds dumb and immature. We need to understand that these guys are professional game designers. They are testing abilities and units they have designed because they want real time use and real time data. They want to see what works and what doesn't and what can be used, like maybe haywire missiles. Unfortunately, we too often play betas as pretty much finished products which are used for testing network loads, and matchmaking systems. I play Halo as well and I remember playing the Reach Beta and all it did was test the network loads like 2 weeks before the release. Blizzard is actively trying everything and although we may not agree with each unit or ability or change, we need to give them all the way to the release before we can make a final decision. Also, above you reference "ramp blockers" like neutral depots and what not, why is Blizzard responsible for that? They provide map editors and tools to allow the community to regulate itself in that regard. It's more immature for Blizzard to say, "This is OUR game, so we're going to make it how WE want it." This game isn't simply Blizzard's creation; they have a community that plays it and many aspects of the game rely on this community. If Blizzard really wants to say, "It's OUR game and this is how WE want it." then they need to be prepared to lose the already dwindling support; if you're not going to listen to your customers, then you don't get the privilege of keeping them. Furthermore, a beta for an expansion to a game that is primarily an e-sport is not meant to just introduce crazy new units and strategies. When you are designing an e-sport, the point of an expansion's beta is to introduce a couple new units to help diversify the metagame and introduce a few new strategies. If this was primarily a game to be enjoyed in a non-competitive setting (thinking something like DoW2), then you can introduce a wider variety of units and try some crazier things. | ||
|
SpecKROELLchen
Germany151 Posts
On November 21 2012 02:31 BronzeKnee wrote: Let me play devil's advocate for a moment...... I am a huge blizzard fan and like all their games, but you sir are absolutely right. I never understood, why blizzard wanted to change TvT. In most eyes it was by far the best mirror. I did not understand, why they wanted to change anything there. Some changes which have to be made are so obvious, every lowleagueplayer would notice it. I was so shocked, that it took blizzard like 10 month to reallize, mothership in pvz is standard play. I thought how could they not noticing without watching anything. I guess there are like 300k Blizzard fans, who would love to do the balancing job and would watch like every tournament to get enough information (they do it anyways, cause they love the game). At least Blizzard should really do things like, inviting pros and discuss new units with them or let them suggest new units, before designing anything. This will make the whole process much faster and better. I dont see any reason to not do it. But well, enough negative spirit. Blizzard is still doing a great job and its alway hard to get the casual-,hardcore- and progamer under one roof. It will take time for sure, but why not begin smart... | ||
|
RanDomFox
United States84 Posts
you may not like the changes brought about in the beta, but they will do one thing, change the game. its understandable that people don't like change and a knee-jerk reaction with be to hate it, but give it time (i bet people thought the same about brood war). blizzard does take the criticism into account but they do know better than the community. | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
The main reason I've quit is just the lack of addressing important issues or taking 2+ years to fix them. I got tired of watching broodlord infestor after about a month and it's still broodlord infestor basically every game. (same for the collussus) And of course units like the swarm host aren't adding a lot of excitement to the game either, especially when you think about the lost possibility to have something as awesome as the lurker. I have nothing against blizzard at all though. They brought me 2 of the best games to ever be developped in it's genre, starcraft (bw) and warcraft tft. And as soon as they live up to their previous level of quality, I'll be there to buy their games again. edit: also amazing posts by bronzeknee. | ||
|
CYFAWS
Sweden275 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On November 21 2012 04:00 RanDomFox wrote: i think its important to realize that beta is for testing new and different things. the original sc beta was sooo different than the game we know then bw changed it all. its an ever ongoing and dynamic process that if past precedent means anything, blizzard will get right in the end. i trust in blizzard. you may not like the changes brought about in the beta, but they will do one thing, change the game. its understandable that people don't like change and a knee-jerk reaction with be to hate it, but give it time (i bet people thought the same about brood war). blizzard does take the criticism into account but they do know better than the community. The sad truth atm is that they dont understand how their "advancements" from BW to SC2 really affect the gameplay. Its SIMPLE math and imagination, but still they dont get it OR they purposefully ignore it due to arrogant thoughts that everything can be fixed through new or changed units. Well it cant ... not really, because Zerg will still have their huge production advantage late in the game ... if they are allowed to have it ... and totally denying them the capability to get there is unfair. Finding a decent balance that works is IMPOSSIBLE, because the timings and builds really work differently on different maps. So they kinda HAVE TO have a broad balance with a big margin of error for the players instead of the super tight one they have now with almost no margin of error. | ||
|
HeeroFX
United States2704 Posts
| ||
|
phodacbiet
United States1740 Posts
On November 21 2012 03:40 green2000 wrote: I trust in Blizzard Me too, two years ago. Remember when everyone said "bw has blah blah blah years, sc2 only has blah blah years"? Well, 2 years later, instead of things being fine and dandy, the OPness/brokeness just shifted race, nothing is fixed (nice map pool guys). Remember, you are trusting in the people that said "arcade system is fine, top 3 interface control" and the people that released diablo 3. | ||
|
padfoota
Taiwan1571 Posts
No problem. Thing is, BW allowed them to wait because it was an age where video games were just being introduced properly. Things were moving slow, allowing them to move slowly, and to experiment. This is post 2010. The amount of video games that come out each year are insane, and whether good or bad, the ones that leaves the hardest first impression is the one who will stay mainstream. Hardcore fans will always stick around, and the real way to make a game successful is to gain new attention and generate new fans. I can give them WoL. I can say its only been 2 and a half years, and BW was good because BW worked on creating a completely new game from the fundamentals of SC1. But they cannot waste anymore time as they have done to D3. Look at D3. So much potential, but such a horrible first impression that it even let the hardcore fans down. The current patches make the game look better and better, but most players have long since moved on to other games. If they flop HoTS too I really dont see Blizzard keeping these titles alive for much longer. Sure, we can still argue that Starcraft is the top RTS and there will unlikely be any direct competitors. But the same audience who can appreciate RTSs are all off watching MOBAs, and they arent coming back if Blizzard doesnt do something amazing. | ||
|
_SilverSurfer_
United States41 Posts
TL;DR: Even though they released D3, I have faith they will deliver a very good, and very polished final game. In Blizzard I trust. | ||
|
Mirosuu
England283 Posts
On November 21 2012 04:47 HeeroFX wrote: True, but should it really take 7+ years to balance a game? You could agrue that Street fighter is balanced when they come out. Why can't the game be ready to play when it comes out? Because an RTS game or even to some extent any PvP type game is a complex emergent system (See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence) You cannot possibly know how the balance of units plays out until you play with them and see how the interactions play out between the units. The units in BW weren't balanced when released. The units in WC3 TFT weren't balanced when released... So why do you think that "just because street fighter is balanced on release" means that an RTS like SC2 should be balanced on release. | ||
|
HeeroFX
United States2704 Posts
On November 21 2012 06:53 Mirosuu wrote: Because an RTS game or even to some extent any PvP type game is a complex emergent system (See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence) You cannot possibly know how the balance of units plays out until you play with them and see how the interactions play out between the units. The units in BW weren't balanced when released. The units in WC3 TFT weren't balanced when released... So why do you think that "just because street fighter is balanced on release" means that an RTS like SC2 should be balanced on release. Because fighters are actually really complex and balanced. Many people may not realize this, but if you play them you know. I do understand that games don't come out fully balanced. However in the case of HOTS it should be closer to balanced when it comes out because we have a beta, and because of what they know from WoL. Blizzard just needs to figure out how to address what we know. But it shouldn't take that long. I feel like blizzard didn't care about the multiplayer aspect of SC 1 for a long time, that could have delayed it + the team was smaller. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On November 21 2012 06:20 _SilverSurfer_ wrote: One thing that has really been bothering me about all this discussion about the HoTS beta is how readily people are giving up on a game that hasn't been released yet. I understand the frustrations people have with the development process as I feel similarly about a lot of the new units and the apparent lack of intelligence that seems to be coming from Blizzard, but you have to give them at least some credit where it's due. Even though most feel they haven't, they have listened to what the community is saying, even if the changes aren't coming as quickly as people would want. I think those who care about the game and it's over-all well being should realize that the game is still in beta (and of course it won't be perfectly balanced yet, I mean, 1 supply Roaches in the WoL beta. Just sayin') and wait for it to actually be finished before making a final judgement. In the mean time, keep up the balance discussions and unit suggestions because they can actually affect the game if a suggestion is good enough and properly addresses a problem. (e.g. NonY's carrier micro video) TL;DR: Even though they released D3, I have faith they will deliver a very good, and very polished final game. In Blizzard I trust. The loss of faith is quite easy to explain: 1. WoL isnt really balanced all that well and has huge problems (at least if you accept the "too tight unit movement" argument as the reason for the deathball). 2. The units which they have presented so far for HotS have undergone several "180 degree changes" in their design concept and this seems rather uncooked and random. Add those together and you get the picture that they havent got a clue how to go about fixing the game. Even though everyone says they are "the developers" that doesnt mean they really have a clue, since it is the first RTS for them in the Starcraft universe. This "first RTS" argumentation should be easy to understand since BW was developed by a different team and they made so many drastic changes to it - compared to BW - that you cant really call it a next iteration of the first game. Sadly they dont include these general changes in their balance thoughts, so any "I trust them to do it right" is rather infuriating, because the connections between problems and the general mechanics are rather obvious ... | ||
| ||
StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs Speed
Larva vs Soma
2v2
OSC
PiGosaur Monday
LiuLi Cup
RSL Revival
Maru vs Reynor
Cure vs TriGGeR
The PondCast
RSL Revival
Zoun vs Classic
Korean StarCraft League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
